Are you offended when someone says they “didnt want someone else to raise my kids”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a reason for why one spouse chose not to work or works from home/at a flexible part time job? Or is this an acceptable turn of phrase?

It's an absolutely valid statement. Many of my friends didn't want their children to be raised by strangers, some had the privilege to do it themselves or get family to support while others had to send them to daycare or leave them with nannies.

+1. I had kids to actually be a mom. I wanted the experience and contracted out parenting as little as possible (although had to do some), whereas I know moms who want to work and were less interested in the day to day of parenting. What is wrong with acknowledging that?

Yeah, this is exactly the kind of defensiveness that people display when using that phrase. SAHMs without a chip on their shoulder don’t sound like this. SAHMs who are confident in their choice don’t disdainfully say that in order to “actually be a mom” a woman has to be solely responsible for daytime childcare.

PP, once your kids are in elementary school, are they suddenly going to be “raised” by elementary school teachers? or does your contempt expire the minute the situation become applicable for you personally?

How long are your kids in school for? Mine are in (elementary) school 6 hours a day, from 9-3. They wake up at 7 and go to bed between 8-9. So roughly 7-8 hours every weekday that they’re not in school vs 6 hrs that they are in school. I’d say it’s a pretty even split between time spent w elementary teachers and parents but parents still coming out on top in terms of hrs spent with kids. We only live 2 blocks from school so I walk w my kids to/from school so I literally am w them all 7-8 hrs of the day that they’re not in school. Not saying this is as a judgment on working parents but yes, as a SAHM I am with my kids more hrs a day that their teachers are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to every sahm on this thread (the new term for you is tradwives), congrats. You are fulfilling the vision of postliberal Christian nationalists like JD Vance and setting back women’s advancement. If you don’t care about equality with men then own that, and model to young girls that a woman belongs at home. But for those of who care about women’s rights, this anti-working woman trend discourse is troubling.

To me true freedom would be doing what you want to do with your time. I want to stay home with my kids. They only have one childhood and it goes by quickly. I don’t want to miss it while working. Staying home with them is much more valuable to me than working. I can work again when my kids are grown.

Did anyone mention freedom? Are you living under occupation and striving for freedom? No wonder one of the working mom PPs mentioned how working keeps you sharp and able to make good arguments. I was talking about women’s rights and the gains that Christian nationalists will make with tradwives like you writing anti-working women diatribes online.

Equality and freedom go hand in hand.

It’s not an anti working women diatribe. Enough with the histrionics. What exactly are you doing to promote feminism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always think of women who need to stay home with kids as just not having spouse who can afford to get her at least some help

Wouldn’t it be the opposite?

You have to get help so you can work. That doesn’t make sense. You can’t work and not have childcare.

no one I know who is remotely well off stays at home with their kids with no help. so saying a man should be ashamed to not be able to have his wife sah with kids and 'raise them herself' runs counter to my idea of what a man would feel proud of being able to afford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to every sahm on this thread (the new term for you is tradwives), congrats. You are fulfilling the vision of postliberal Christian nationalists like JD Vance and setting back women’s advancement. If you don’t care about equality with men then own that, and model to young girls that a woman belongs at home. But for those of who care about women’s rights, this anti-working woman trend discourse is troubling.

Do you honestly believe the only way to have equality with men is by working? You sound very narrow minded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So to every sahm on this thread (the new term for you is tradwives), congrats. You are fulfilling the vision of postliberal Christian nationalists like JD Vance and setting back women’s advancement. If you don’t care about equality with men then own that, and model to young girls that a woman belongs at home. But for those of who care about women’s rights, this anti-working woman trend discourse is troubling.

All you are doing with this post and this rhetoric is putting down other women for choosing to spend more time with their kids. Do you not see something anti-woman about that? I do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a reason for why one spouse chose not to work or works from home/at a flexible part time job? Or is this an acceptable turn of phrase?

It's an absolutely valid statement. Many of my friends didn't want their children to be raised by strangers, some had the privilege to do it themselves or get family to support while others had to send them to daycare or leave them with nannies.

+1. I had kids to actually be a mom. I wanted the experience and contracted out parenting as little as possible (although had to do some), whereas I know moms who want to work and were less interested in the day to day of parenting. What is wrong with acknowledging that?

Yeah, this is exactly the kind of defensiveness that people display when using that phrase. SAHMs without a chip on their shoulder don’t sound like this. SAHMs who are confident in their choice don’t disdainfully say that in order to “actually be a mom” a woman has to be solely responsible for daytime childcare.

PP, once your kids are in elementary school, are they suddenly going to be “raised” by elementary school teachers? or does your contempt expire the minute the situation become applicable for you personally?

How long are your kids in school for? Mine are in (elementary) school 6 hours a day, from 9-3. They wake up at 7 and go to bed between 8-9. So roughly 7-8 hours every weekday that they’re not in school vs 6 hrs that they are in school. I’d say it’s a pretty even split between time spent w elementary teachers and parents but parents still coming out on top in terms of hrs spent with kids. We only live 2 blocks from school so I walk w my kids to/from school so I literally am w them all 7-8 hrs of the day that they’re not in school. Not saying this is as a judgment on working parents but yes, as a SAHM I am with my kids more hrs a day that their teachers are.

Most kids are at school for about 7h a day but you're tripping if you think the ratio of time spent is important. Some days yours will be in school for longer if they have sports. Some kids with sahms spend hours at friends houses on certain days. Equating time spent with a person to 'raising' them and claiming that someone who gets home at 5 is not 'raising' their kids is absolutely ridiculous and laughable. And obviously just a weird flex to make someone feel falsely superior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a reason for why one spouse chose not to work or works from home/at a flexible part time job? Or is this an acceptable turn of phrase?

It's an absolutely valid statement. Many of my friends didn't want their children to be raised by strangers, some had the privilege to do it themselves or get family to support while others had to send them to daycare or leave them with nannies.

+1. I had kids to actually be a mom. I wanted the experience and contracted out parenting as little as possible (although had to do some), whereas I know moms who want to work and were less interested in the day to day of parenting. What is wrong with acknowledging that?

Yeah, this is exactly the kind of defensiveness that people display when using that phrase. SAHMs without a chip on their shoulder don’t sound like this. SAHMs who are confident in their choice don’t disdainfully say that in order to “actually be a mom” a woman has to be solely responsible for daytime childcare.

PP, once your kids are in elementary school, are they suddenly going to be “raised” by elementary school teachers? or does your contempt expire the minute the situation become applicable for you personally?

How long are your kids in school for? Mine are in (elementary) school 6 hours a day, from 9-3. They wake up at 7 and go to bed between 8-9. So roughly 7-8 hours every weekday that they’re not in school vs 6 hrs that they are in school. I’d say it’s a pretty even split between time spent w elementary teachers and parents but parents still coming out on top in terms of hrs spent with kids. We only live 2 blocks from school so I walk w my kids to/from school so I literally am w them all 7-8 hrs of the day that they’re not in school. Not saying this is as a judgment on working parents but yes, as a SAHM I am with my kids more hrs a day that their teachers are.

Most kids are at school for about 7h a day but you're tripping if you think the ratio of time spent is important. Some days yours will be in school for longer if they have sports. Some kids with sahms spend hours at friends houses on certain days. Equating time spent with a person to 'raising' them and claiming that someone who gets home at 5 is not 'raising' their kids is absolutely ridiculous and laughable. And obviously just a weird flex to make someone feel falsely superior.

I didn’t say anything about raising kids. I was simply talking about time spent. And i said nothing about amount of time spent being important. I was just reciting the PP’s point about elementary teachers spending more time w kids than parents. It is just not true. You are reacting to things that aren’t even in my post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to every sahm on this thread (the new term for you is tradwives), congrats. You are fulfilling the vision of postliberal Christian nationalists like JD Vance and setting back women’s advancement. If you don’t care about equality with men then own that, and model to young girls that a woman belongs at home. But for those of who care about women’s rights, this anti-working woman trend discourse is troubling.

Do you honestly believe the only way to have equality with men is by working? You sound very narrow minded.

How do we achieve equality with men then? A PP above was saying that education was key to equality with men—so education is a way to have equal opportunities with men but working isn’t?

[Anonymous]

I would never say this to someone. Both SAHP and working parents are raising their kids and it’s offensive to state otherwise.

However, I do think all parents should spend more time w their kids during the kids’ childhoods. I think we should have more paid parental leave, more flexible work schedules, more time off for vacations and family time, our kids should have less time on screens, all things that would give families more time together. This is not any individual parent’s problem but a societal problem. Our society does not value kids and families and it should.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to every sahm on this thread (the new term for you is tradwives), congrats. You are fulfilling the vision of postliberal Christian nationalists like JD Vance and setting back women’s advancement. If you don’t care about equality with men then own that, and model to young girls that a woman belongs at home. But for those of who care about women’s rights, this anti-working woman trend discourse is troubling.

Do you honestly believe the only way to have equality with men is by working? You sound very narrow minded.

How do we achieve equality with men then? A PP above was saying that education was key to equality with men—so education is a way to have equal opportunities with men but working isn’t?

You’re not working for yourself or your equality. You’re working for a capitalist system. Is that equality?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if I "had" to work or "chose" to work. We could have made it on DH's income but he does not want me to stay home because he wants an UMC lifestyle instead of a MC one, which I would have been fine with.

It doesn’t sound like you had a choice. I would have told him to make more money if he wanted a certain lifestyle. If a mother really feels it’s important to be at home for her children then a middle class lifestyle would be fine. Probably better than fine because there would be more like minded mothers to meet and less materialistic people around you.

Yes, a woman’s place is in the home. If he wants more money it’s his job as a leader of the home and provider to go get it. I don’t understand why you stood for this and let him bully you into a job.

I get you’re being sarcastic but the reality is more women than men would prefer to stay home and women have babies. You can claim that it shouldn’t be this way, but the vast majority of women are uninterested in a man who can’t provide for them. It’s biology.

Guarantee you that the PP had a terrible sex life and is or was unhappy. There’s nothing that kills a sex life for a woman like a man who can’t provide and allow a woman to stay home to watch her own kids.

So why should women go to college or grad school? If a 15 year old girl who wanted to be a lawyer and also have a family came to you for advice, would you tell her what you really believe, that women should be at home with their kids and be provided for by their husbands?

Because there’s no guarantee in life that you’re going to get married and have kids. I knew this when I was 21. I was at a top university, and pursued a career where I could make decent money and support myself. I fully wanted and intended to get married and have kids, but not pursuing an education would have been putting the cart before the horse.

Additionally, I did not have kids until I was 29. I worked for 8 years out of college. I actually still work at 35, but if we could afford our lifestyle on DH’s income alone, I would probably choose to be home with my kids, focusing on parenting well instead of feeling like I’m constantly dropping the ball either with my family, work, or taking care of the house.

I hate the argument of “why should women bother getting an education at all?” if they choose to stay home with their kids. The answer is because they should have the same opportunities as men. And you can’t possibly know at 18 if and when you’re going to have children.

The prevalence of tradwives sets back equality. Why? Because people are influenced. A woman who decides to give up her career is not operating in a vacuum. Her choices are hers of course (cue the “I made the best decision for my family” tradwives—yes, I’m talking about systems, not your initial choice which no one cares about) but they influence society. And the more women opt out of the workforce (which Christian nationalists want to see happen) the harder it becomes for ambitious working women to thrive.

Labeling sahms “trad wives” is judgmental. The reality is that a lot of parents - mostly women - want to be home with their kids instead of balancing both a career and kids. You can call it whatever you want, but the reality is that a) women have a somewhat limited range of years to have kids b) raising kids is a full time job whether your outsource it or not c) most men aren’t doing 50% of the child rearing, mental load or house management even if their wives DO work and d) there are plenty of jobs for ambitious women.

Women shouldn’t be forced to burn the candle on both ends so women who WANT to work have more women in the workplace for “ambitious” people like you. I say this as a full time working mother and a democrat who despises Trump.

And by the way, it’s insane that people like you eschew having a parent at home present to raise their children like they’re some waste of time. Like what are you even preaching? The comeback to “why bother getting an education?” comment from people like you should be “why do YOU bother having kids if they’re not worthy of your time?”

Who said anything about “forcing” women? I was talking about system-level changes and the way they affect women’s rights. I was going to reply to your comment but someone with your level of critical thinking isn’t worth it.

Lol - I’m sure I’m missing out on some compelling arguments from the socialist who thinks all parents should work regardless of whether they want to and kids should be in childcare 12 hours a day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to every sahm on this thread (the new term for you is tradwives), congrats. You are fulfilling the vision of postliberal Christian nationalists like JD Vance and setting back women’s advancement. If you don’t care about equality with men then own that, and model to young girls that a woman belongs at home. But for those of who care about women’s rights, this anti-working woman trend discourse is troubling.

All you are doing with this post and this rhetoric is putting down other women for choosing to spend more time with their kids. Do you not see something anti-woman about that? I do.

you just proved her point with your passive aggressive comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to every sahm on this thread (the new term for you is tradwives), congrats. You are fulfilling the vision of postliberal Christian nationalists like JD Vance and setting back women’s advancement. If you don’t care about equality with men then own that, and model to young girls that a woman belongs at home. But for those of who care about women’s rights, this anti-working woman trend discourse is troubling.

All you are doing with this post and this rhetoric is putting down other women for choosing to spend more time with their kids. Do you not see something anti-woman about that? I do.

you just proved her point with your passive aggressive comment.

What do you want me to say? It’s the truth. Sorry it hurts your feelings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to every sahm on this thread (the new term for you is tradwives), congrats. You are fulfilling the vision of postliberal Christian nationalists like JD Vance and setting back women’s advancement. If you don’t care about equality with men then own that, and model to young girls that a woman belongs at home. But for those of who care about women’s rights, this anti-working woman trend discourse is troubling.

Do you honestly believe the only way to have equality with men is by working? You sound very narrow minded.

How do we achieve equality with men then? A PP above was saying that education was key to equality with men—so education is a way to have equal opportunities with men but working isn’t?

Women are not equal to men. Women cannot expect to have the same wages and same promotions if they don’t put in the same hours and work as men. This is almost impossible to do as the prime career development ages overlap with fertility and time of having young children. I’m not saying women cannot have careers or they should stay home. I think it was a huge disservice to girls in my generation to say we are equal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to every sahm on this thread (the new term for you is tradwives), congrats. You are fulfilling the vision of postliberal Christian nationalists like JD Vance and setting back women’s advancement. If you don’t care about equality with men then own that, and model to young girls that a woman belongs at home. But for those of who care about women’s rights, this anti-working woman trend discourse is troubling.

Do you honestly believe the only way to have equality with men is by working? You sound very narrow minded.

How do we achieve equality with men then? A PP above was saying that education was key to equality with men—so education is a way to have equal opportunities with men but working isn’t?

Women are not equal to men. Women cannot expect to have the same wages and same promotions if they don’t put in the same hours and work as men. This is almost impossible to do as the prime career development ages overlap with fertility and time of having young children. I’m not saying women cannot have careers or they should stay home. I think it was a huge disservice to girls in my generation to say we are equal.

Exactly. You are saying what the tradwives on this thread won’t admit. A woman’s place is her home, a way of life that tracks perfectly with the Christian nationalist agenda that is now on the rise.